The petroleum business isn’t one of those that promotes moderation in thinking, especially when people decide to offer their opinions about it all. You’re either part of the group that proclaims, “Drill, baby! Drill!” — the slogan for the Republican Party of the United States in 2008, or you’re in the trenches with those who believe that “black gold” is the root of all evil in the modern world. That’s why politicians are always in the uncomfortable position of choosing between being seen as the protectors of the environment or as its worst enemies.
That’s why President Obama’s recent decision to grant oil drilling permits to areas that had been off-limits has been applauded by some and soundly criticized by others. The strange thing about it is that the idea to search for oil in areas like Alaska — today defended by Obama — was proposed by his predecessor, George W. Bush, who, for just such decisions, was dubbed “the toxic Texan.”
When you’re the one in power, you feel the full weight of economic realities. The United States consumes close to a quarter of the world’s oil, yet it only has 2 percent of known oil reserves, as a New York Times editorial reminds us this week. By looking at the situation in that light, it’s obvious that the United States cannot afford the luxury of not extracting whatever crude oil it can find in its own territory. Ex-President Bush, from his retirement, must be smiling with contentment and commenting, as he reads the news, “Well, well! Who’s the ‘toxic’ one now?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.